Near-Source Risk Functions for Particulate Matter Are Critical When Assessing the Health Benefits of Local Abatement Strategies

David Segersson, Christer Johansson and Bertil Forsberg
Additional contact information
David Segersson: Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute, 601 76 Norrköping, Sweden
Christer Johansson: Department of Environmental Science, Stockholm University, 114 19 Stockholm, Sweden
Bertil Forsberg: Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Section of Sustainable Health, Umea University, 901 87 Umeå, Sweden

IJERPH, 2021, vol. 18, issue 13, 1-15

Abstract: When mortality or other health outcomes attributable to fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) are estimated, the same exposure–response function (ERF) is usually assumed regardless of the source and composition of the particles, and independently of the spatial resolution applied in the exposure model. While several recent publications indicate that ERFs based on exposure models resolving within-city gradients are steeper per concentration unit (?gm ?3 ), the ERF for PM 2.5 recommended by the World Health Organization does not reflect this observation and is heavily influenced by studies based on between-city exposure estimates. We evaluated the potential health benefits of three air pollution abatement strategies: electrification of light vehicles, reduced use of studded tires, and introduction of congestion charges in Stockholm and Gothenburg, using different ERFs. We demonstrated that using a single ERF for PM 2.5 likely results in an underestimation of the effect of local measures and may be misleading when evaluating abatement strategies. We also suggest applying ERFs that distinguish between near-source and regional contributions of exposure to PM 2.5 . If separate ERFs are applied for near-source and regional PM 2.5 , congestion charges as well as a reduction of studded tire use are estimated to be associated with a significant reduction in the mortality burden in both Gothenburg and Stockholm. In some scenarios the number of premature deaths is more than 10 times higher using separate ERFs in comparison to using a single ERF irrespective of sources as recommended by the WHO. For electrification, the net change in attributable deaths is small or within the uncertainty range depending on the choice of ERF.

Keywords: dispersion modeling; exposure; particulate matter; health impact assessment; abatement strategies; electrification; studded tires; congestion charges (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/13/6847/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/13/6847/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:13:p:6847-:d:582443

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().